Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCARGILL EXPANSION - PDP/FDP - FDP130043 - DECISION - MINUTES/NOTESthe Drake Road public sidewalk is necessary for security, and the building location allows for additional landscaping to soften the effect of the fence. DECISION Based on the foregoing findings, the Hearing Officer hereby enters the following rulings: 1. The PDP/FP and the three Modifications of Standard are approved as submitted. DATED this 7 h day of February, 2014. 5 Kendra L. Carberry Hearing Officer 21712014 Q: I USERSTORT COLLINS LAND USDCARGILDDECISIONDOC 5. The first Modification of Standard (Sections 4.5(E)(2)(b) & (e)) meets the applicable requirements of Section 2.8.2(H) of the Code. a. The Modification would not be detrimental to the public good. b. The PDP/FP will promote the general purpose of the standard for which the Modification is requested equally well or better than would a plan which complies with the standard. C. The standard does not provide any separation requirement from buildings that meet the maximum of 20,000 square feet each, so two buildings meeting the code could be .placed side -by -side and appear as one larger building. Although the PDP/FP proposes one building, it is designed with articulation and distinct building masses to break up the appearance of one large building mass. Further, buildings can exceed 20,000 square feet if used for schools or places of worship or assembly, so some larger buildings are already allowed in the L-M-N District, and this building contributes to the Cargill campus setting, where employees can walk from building to building. 6. The second Modification of Standard (Sections 4.5(E)(2)(f) & 3.5.3(C)(2)) meets the applicable requirements of Section 2.8.2(H) of the Code. a. The granting of the Modification would not be detrimental to the public good. b. The PDP/FP will promote the general purpose of the standard for which the Modification is requested equally well or better than would a plan which complies with the standard. C. To help screen the vehicle use area the applicant has provided an increase in landscape plantings along the right-of-way, adding to the visual interest and engagement of the site. d. The PDP/FP only includes a drive aisle in front of the office portion of the building, which drive is delineated from the rest of the vehicle use area with scored and colored concrete, and the sidewalk connection leading to the building entrance is enhanced as it crosses the vehicle drive, which indicates to a driver that there is crossing pedestrian traffic. 7. The third Modification of Standard (Sections 3.5.3(C)(2)(a) & (c)) meets the applicable requirements of Section 2.8.2(H) of the Code. a. The granting of the Modification would not be detrimental to the public good. b. The PDP/FP will promote the general purpose of the standard for which the Modification is requested equally well or better than would a plan which complies with the standard. C. If the building were located at the required 25' setback, this would reduce the landscaping and outdoor patio for employees. The existing fence that runs parallel along 4 21712014 Q:IUSERSTORTCOLLINS LAND USEICARGILLIDECISIONDOC f. The PDP/FP complies with Section 3.4.1, Natural Habitats and Features, because the PDP/FP does not include any natural areas, habitats and features. g. The PDP/FP complies with Section 3.5.3(A) and (B), Building Standards, because the PDP/FP incorporates human -scale urban design through the use of the following: building articulation; identifiable pedestrian entry accommodating bicycle access and parking; landscape areas along the right-of-way; and pedestrian seating for employees visible from the street. h. The PDP/FP complies with Section 3.5.3(D), Variation in Massing, because the use of a variety of building materials and varying setbacks creates differentiating building masses that provide distinct visual changes along a single building farade. i. The PDP/FP complies with Section 3.5.3(E), Character and Image, because: the building has varying setbacks, dividing the building into distinct masses; within each building mass there is a pallet of materials from brick, stucco, and metal reveals; there are differing window patterns on each distinct mass; the main entrance is well-defined and made visible from the public right-of-way by the use of fenestration and a punctuating awning; there is a pedestrian walkway leading from the public sidewalk straight to the main entrance; the building uses an alternating base material with either brick or stucco; and the building top varies at the different building masses, but is still recognizable. j. The PDP/FP complies with Section 3.6.3, Street Pattern and Connectivity Standards, because there are no new public streets or street -like private drives, and the PDP/FP will not prevent the existing connections from the surrounding residential developments from continuing on to the property in the future. k. The PDP/FP complies with Section 3.6.4, Transportation Level of Service Requirements, because the Traffic Operations Department reviewed information based impacts of the vehicles and did waive the need to create a Transportation Impact Study seeing the proposed plans will not create and/or increase any significant impact. 4. The PDP/FP complies with the applicable standards contained in Article 4 of the Code for the L-M-N zone district. a. The PDP/FP complies with Section 4.5(A) and (B), Permitted Uses, because the proposed expansion of facilities of a Limited Permitted Use is permitted in the L-M-N District. b. The PDP/FP complies with Section 4.5(E)(2), Development Standards, because: the office building is at a height of 18', exceeding the 1.5 story minimum height and not reaching the 2.5 story maximum height; the building mass is stepped along all four sides creating desired articulation; along the south side of the building the stepped massing has allowed for an outdoor patio area for employees; the stepped building mass includes at least three distinguishable roof planes; outdoor storage is prohibited; the PDP/FP includes three buildings, only one of which will be painted; there are several colors and materials used on the office building; and the use of different materials and colors divides the building mass into smaller proportions, contributing to a legible human scale. 3 21712014 Q: I USERSTORT COLLINS LAND USEICARGILLIDECISIONDOC From the Applicant: Cathy Mathis, Ian Shuff From the Public: N/A FINDINGS 1. Evidence presented to the Hearing Officer established the fact that the hearing was properly posted, legal notices mailed and notice published. 2. The PDP/FP complies with the applicable General Provisions contained in Article 1 of the Code. a. The PDP/FP complies with Division 1.6, Existing Limited Permitted Uses, because Sections 1.6.2 and 1.6.5 both have additional limitations for an Existing Limited Permitted Use, and the PDP/FP complies with the additional limitations, and new structures for an Existing Limited Permitted Use must be reviewed by the applicable standards of Article 3 and Article 4. 3. The PDP/FP complies with the applicable General Development Standards contained in Article 3 of the Code. a. The PDP/FP complies with Section 3.2.1, Landscaping and Tree Protection, because: the City Forester approved the tree protection plan; full tree stocking is provided along the building; trees are planted in the parking lot interior and perimeter; and the street trees and their locations were recently approved through a Minor Amendment. b. The PDP/FP complies with Section 3.2.2, Access, Circulation and Parking, because: the public sidewalk along Drake Road was recently approved through a Minor Amendment; a 6' wide sidewalk connection is provided directly from the public sidewalk to the main entrance of the building, with the sidewalk enhanced as it crosses the drive aisle by a raised crossing and color concrete; the PDP/FP does not exceed the maximum number of parking stalls allowed; the sidewalk system contributes to the safety of the development and allows pedestrians to move from building to building on the campus. C. The PDP/FP complies with Section 3.2.3, Solar Access, Orientation and Shading, because: the buildings do not negatively impact the solar access of adjoining properties; the buildings are less than 25' in height; and the buildings are sufficiently set back from the property lines. d. The PDP/FP complies with Section 3.2.4, Site Lighting, because the photometric plan shows a minimum average 1 foot-candle for the parking lot areas, and all the lighting fixtures are down -directional and fully shielded. e. The PDP/FP complies with Section 3.2.5, Trash and Recycling Enclosures, because the trash/recycling enclosure is located on the north side of the warehouse portion of the building, provides required pedestrian walk-in access, and is located on a concrete pad. 2 21712014 Q: I USERSTORT COLLINS LAND USEICARGILLIDECISIONDOC CITY OF FORT COLLINS TYPE 1 ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING FINDINGS AND DECISION HEARING DATE: January 30, 2014 PROJECT NAME: Cargill Expansion Project Development Plan/Final Plan CASE NUMBER: FDP130043 APPLICANT: Cathy Mathis The Birdsall Group 444 Mountain Avenue Berthoud, CO 80513 OWNER: Cargill PO Box 5626 Minneapolis, MN 55440-5626 c/o Steve Stadelmaier 2540 East Drake Road Fort Collins, CO 80525 HEARING OFFICER Kendra L. Carberry PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for approval of a combined Project Development Plan and Final Plan (PDP/FP) on property located north of the T-intersection of Kansas Drive and Drake Road. The PDP/FP proposes an office building with an attached growth room and warehouse along the Drake Road frontage, plus 2 greenhouses north of the proposed office building. The PDP/FP also includes modification requests to allow vehicle parking in between the building and the right-of-way. SUMMARY OF DECISION: Approved ZONE DISTRICT: Low Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood (L-M-N) HEARING: The Hearing Officer opened the hearing at approximately 5:45 p.m. on January 30, 2014, in Conference Room A, 281 North College Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado. EVIDENCE: During the hearing, the Hearing Officer accepted the following evidence: (1) Planning Department Staff Report; (2) application, plans, maps and other supporting documents submitted by the applicant; and (3) written comments from Judith Havnen (the Land Use Code, the Comprehensive Plan and the formally promulgated polices of the City are all considered part of the record considered by the Hearing Officer). TESTIMONY: The following persons testified at the hearing: From the City: Noah Beals 1 21712014 Q: I USERSWORT COLLINS LAND USEICARGILLIDECISION DOC F m City of mort Collins N O T I C E O F DECIS!R' February 7, 2014 Dear Public Hearing Attendee: H E A R I N G This letter is being sent to you because you attended a recent Administrative Hearing and/or provided testimony. Attached to this letter you will find a copy of the Type 1 Administrative Hearing Findings, Conclusions and Decision for Cargill Expansion combined Project Development Plan/Final Plan, #FDP130043. This final decision of the Administrative Hearing Officer may be appealed to the City Council, in accordance with Chapter 2, Article 11, Division 3 of the City Code, within 14 calendar days of the date of final action (February 07, 2014) by the Hearing Officer. The deadline to file an appeal is 5:00 p.m. on February 21, 2014. Guidelines explaining the appeal process, including the Code provisions previously referenced, can be found online at fcgov.com/cityclerk/appeals.p>�, or may be obtained in the City Clerk's Office at 300 LaPorte Avenue. As previously mentioned, this decision letter was sent because you signed in at the public hearing and/or provided testimony at that hearing. There may be an instance where someone may have attended the hearing but did not sign -in and therefore will not receive this letter. Please feel free to share this information with them. Additionally, you may contact Sarah Burnett, Neighborhood Development Review Liaison, at 970-224-6076 or sburnettPfcgnv.r can or myself with any questions. Sarah is available to assist residents who have questions about the review process, hearing officer decisions or how to appeal a decision to City Council. Thank you for participating in the development review process. Sincerely, Noah Beals, LEED GA City Planner 970.416.2313 nbeals@fcgov.com The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodationsfor access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangememsfor persons with disabilities. Please call 970-220-6750for assistance. Fsta es una notificaci6n sabre la reum6n de su vecindarto o sabre una audiencia priblica sabre el desarrollo o proyecto en la propiedad cerca de donde wted es el duedo de proptedad. Si usted desea que esta notii icacibn sea traducida al espanol sin costa alguno, favor enviar an correo electrcmico en espanol a la stgukmw direccitin electr6nica: ntlesix�cgov.com. Development Review Center Planning Services 281 North College Avenue PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 970-221.6750 frnnv rnminpvpinnmpntRpvipw HEARING TIME AND LOCATION Thursday January 301^, 2014 5:00 p.m. (This was scheduled as the 2n^ item.)Conference Room A 281 North College Avenue, Fort Collins PROPOSAL NAME & LOCATION Cargill Expansion 2540 E Drake Road (The site is located on the north side of the T- intersection of Kansas Drive and Drake Rd) PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION ■ Expansion of the existing Cargill campus • Office building (16,791 sq. ft.) with an attached warehouse (16,305 sq. ft.) and attached growth room (9,386 sq, ft.) ■ Two additional greenhouses (11,323 sq, ft. each) ■ 81 Parking spaces and 8 bike racks ■ New vehicle entrance to the site, west of the existing entrance. Existing entrance to be gated for emergency access only MODIFICATIONS REQUESTED ■ Permission to allow an additional setback of 71 ft. (instead of 25 ft.) and parking area between the building and the street. ■ Permission to allow building masses to exceed a 10,000 sq. ft. minimum and the footprint of the building to exceed 20,000 sq. ft. ZONING INFORMATION ■ Low Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood District (L-M-N) ■ Cargill is an Existing Limited Permitted Use in the L-M-N District HELPFUL RESOURCES • Hearing Notice, Plans, and Staff Report: fcaov com/ReviewAoendas ■ Appeals Process: www.fcawcomlappeals • Appeal Guidelines. http /lwww fcoovcomlotvderklodflappeal- ouideline.s,of ■ Information About the Review Process: fcgov. corn/Co7enReview